netdev - Re: [RFC] [DCCP]: Deprecate SOCK_DCCP in favour of SOCK

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 14 May 2008 07:06:19 -0700
From:	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
To:	Gerrit Renker <gerrit@....abdn.ac.uk>,
	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
	R?mi Denis-Courmont <rdenis@...phalempin.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	David Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, dccp@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] [DCCP]: Deprecate SOCK_DCCP in favour of SOCK_DGRAM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Gerrit Renker wrote:
> RFC 3493 says that 0 for socktype/protocol means that caller will accept
> any socket type / protocol, so presumably this does include DCCP and UDP-Lite.

I know what the RFC says.  But there are a gazillion of protocols out
there and I won't create a record for all of them in case socktype and
protocol are zero.  That's just overkill in 99.9% of all cases.

I assumption is that UDPlite is just too specialized to be useful to a
wide array of people.  Yes, it case be supported if explicitly requested
but should be returned if 0/0 is passed in.

What I'm asking is whether this is a fair assumption and what the story
of DCCP is.

- --
➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIKvHb2ijCOnn/RHQRAlz5AKCvOSOm7PR7ljfyZ9krq0TtzZUTbgCdFLLj
F1fvWvR+VvXUSE5x+VtgsqQ=
=3Lft
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html